Just need to praise my 2021 GT-Line!

[photoguy007]

Just returned from an 800 mile road trip. This 2.0 Turbo machine is simply amazing! Smooth, comfortable, fuel efficient, more than enough power, handling, love the responsive steering, etc. I was considering boosting the power (software), but after this trip, I realized it really doesn't need it, no issues at all with passing power. Thank you KIA for such a piece of art!

 

[Waynerm002]

If you think the 2.0T has enough passing power, you will be amazed by the 2.5T and blown away by the 3.3T. Great car no matter what trim you get.

 

[jays2000]

The 2.0T is a different animal from the 3.3T for sure. The smaller engine and reduced weight (assuming you have the RWD) give it a light, tossable character. Keeping it in Sport (or using the paddles) to keep the revs above 2000 RPM results in plenty of thrust anywhere short of the track as well.

 

[photoguy007]

If you think the 2.0T has enough passing power, you will be amazed by the 2.5T and blown away by the 3.3T. Great car no matter what trim you get.

I'm sure they do, but this is more than enough for my needs, I have plenty for spirited driving, the power band is right on the money.

The 2.0 gets the job done with loads of smiles.

Plus I just scored a set of stock 19's with tires (low miles), for an excellent price, so my GT-Line is much stickier in the corners now. I could've purchased a 2022, but I saved over $7500 off sticker, was a no brainer. I can always do a stage 1, if I feel the need for power, for much less than I would've paid for a 2022.

Thanks

 

[photoguy007]

The 2.0T is a different animal from the 3.3T for sure. The smaller engine and reduced weight (assuming you have the RWD) give it a light, tossable character. Keeping it in Sport (or using the paddles) to keep the revs above 2000 RPM results in plenty of thrust anywhere short of the track as well.

I have AWD, the weight loss is still significant, and very tossable. I used the paddles quite a bit, though my highway mpg did shrink massively, of course my average speed was higher than usual on the way home, lol!

Thanks

 

[MerlintheMad]

I like the sound of that. I went with the 3.3L simply because I was so sick and tired of losing my momentum each time some a$$hat pulled out from behind a semi to pass at their cruise control setting speed. Now, I can size up the position of vehicles ahead, step on it and swiftly shut down any such notions in the minds of heedless, inconsiderate persons (especially other semis that seem to not think that they're being rude to inch by each other for miles). I still get caught, but not enough, now, to ruin my equanimity. It's good to hear that the 2.0L has enough git up and go to satisfy your driving style. Keeping the RPMs in the maximum torque band (beginning above 2K RPM, and you can always pull the left paddle and kick it up to over 4K in an instant, at need) is definitely how to pass fast, which is my main indulgence on a road trip.

 

[photoguy007]

I like the sound of that. I went with the 3.3L simply because I was so sick and tired of losing my momentum each time some a$$hat pulled out from behind a semi to pass at their cruise control setting speed. Now, I can size up the position of vehicles ahead, step on it and swiftly shut down any such notions in the minds of heedless, inconsiderate persons (especially other semis that seem to not think that they're being rude to inch by each other for miles). I still get caught, but not enough, now, to ruin my equanimity. It's good to hear that the 2.0L has enough git up and go to satisfy your driving style. Keeping the RPMs in the maximum torque band (beginning above 2K RPM, and you can always pull the left paddle and kick it up to over 4K in an instant, at need) is definitely how to pass fast, which is my main indulgence on a road trip.

I definitely just experienced this. I love road tripping, just getting back to it after a few years off. I know your 3.3 must move like a race horse, I was tempted, mainly wasn't in the budget though.

 

[stoopid]

You'd love the 3.3TT then. I understand budget constraints, it's partly why I didn't get the GT1 or 2 trims [their added value really didn't quite add for me anyway].

 

[MerlintheMad]

I definitely just experienced this. I love road tripping, just getting back to it after a few years off. I know your 3.3 must move like a race horse, I was tempted, mainly wasn't in the budget though.

Any car that will do zero to sixty in either side of six seconds is hauling; then in nearly all situations after that it's just overkill fun.

I'm quite sure that if the Stinger had only come in RWD with a 2.0L I would have still bought it: because even that much torque would have fit my needs to pass fast. Also just as likely, the Stinger forum (in an imaginary world where the 3.3L does not exist) would be all about modding, even more than it is now: and I would fall for the temptation to increase my acceleration at least a tad. I'm very conservative, so a piggyback that uses normal pump gas is all I'd have gone for: something that would not risk my warranty.

(Way back in the day, my first car, a '71 Super Beetle, got a tuned exhaust and centrifugal advance distributer: and I was a happy camper: I sounded like a Bug with an attitude, and the power difference was noticeable: little did I know that the future held such a car as the Stinger for me. Providence was kind and even though I still drove it like a Bug with clearance, even on unfinished roads, as here, I never ripped it off on any rocks.)

 

[photoguy007]

You'd love the 3.3TT then. I understand budget constraints, it's partly why I didn't get the GT1 or 2 trims [their added value really didn't quite add for me anyway].

I would've probably made the same purchase, really is a great engine. I'm not ruling out a 3.3 in the future. Wondering how long KIA will keep the Stinger?

 

[photoguy007]

Any car that will do zero to sixty in either side of six seconds is hauling; then in nearly all situations after that it's just overkill fun.

I'm quite sure that if the Stinger had only come in RWD with a 2.0L I would have still bought it: because even that much torque would have fit my needs to pass fast. Also just as likely, the Stinger forum (in an imaginary world where the 3.3L does not exist) would be all about modding, even more than it is now: and I would fall for the temptation to increase my acceleration at least a tad. I'm very conservative, so a piggyback that uses normal pump gas is all I'd have gone for: something that would not risk my warranty.

(Way back in the day, my first car, a '71 Super Beetle, got a tuned exhaust and centrifugal advance distributer: and I was a happy camper: I sounded like a Bug with an attitude, and the power difference was noticeable: little did I know that the future held such a car as the Stinger for me.
View attachment 57347)

Check that out! I had an ex-girlfriend with a Beetle, I loved that car.

 

[MerlintheMad]

Check that out! I had an ex-girlfriend with a Beetle, I loved that car.

My wife had a '67 Beetle and I had my '71 Super Beetle when we got married; so, we were a two-Bug family for the first year or so. Much later, I picked up a yellow Bug and got it fixed up in a utilitarian fashion (touchup paint, sewed the torn headliner back up, new running boards, etc. I think it was a '74, so, it was c. twenty-five years old when I got it; ran pretty well, but the poor headlights and the frosty windows in the winter, combined, killed my enthusiasm. Hah.

 

[monusa]

Keeping it in Sport (or using the paddles) to keep the revs above 2000 RPM results in plenty of thrust anywhere short of the track as well.

99% of the time, I use the paddles for that exact reason!!!! May not be needed as much on the 3.3 but on the 2.0, unless using cruise control, almost required. With jb4 makes the 2.0 a "hoot"....

 

[photoguy007]

My wife had a '67 Beetle and I had my '71 Super Beetle when we got married; so, we were a two-Bug family for the first year or so. Much later, I picked up a yellow Bug and got it fixed up in a utilitarian fashion (touchup paint, sewed the torn headliner back up, new running boards, etc. I think it was a '74, so, it was c. twenty-five years old when I got it; ran pretty well, but the poor headlights and the frosty windows in the winter, combined, killed my enthusiasm. Hah.

The Beetle is on my list, I must have one. A two bug family, that's impressive. Definitely not the best winter transportation, frosty windows would drive me batty.

 

[photoguy007]

99% of the time, I use the paddles for that exact reason!!!! May not be needed as much on the 3.3 but on the 2.0, unless using cruise control, almost required. With jb4 makes the 2.0 a "hoot"....

Please tell me more about your JB4 experience with your 2.0.

 

[westcoastGT]

Any car that will do zero to sixty in either side of six seconds is hauling; then in nearly all situations after that it's just overkill fun.

I'm quite sure that if the Stinger had only come in RWD with a 2.0L I would have still bought it: because even that much torque would have fit my needs to pass fast. Also just as likely, the Stinger forum (in an imaginary world where the 3.3L does not exist) would be all about modding, even more than it is now: and I would fall for the temptation to increase my acceleration at least a tad. I'm very conservative, so a piggyback that uses normal pump gas is all I'd have gone for: something that would not risk my warranty.

(Way back in the day, my first car, a '71 Super Beetle, got a tuned exhaust and centrifugal advance distributer: and I was a happy camper: I sounded like a Bug with an attitude, and the power difference was noticeable: little did I know that the future held such a car as the Stinger for me. Providence was kind and even though I still drove it like a Bug with clearance, even on unfinished roads, as here, I never ripped it off on any rocks.)
View attachment 57347

GREAT PIC AS USUAL !! . The history of Merlin and cars ...................and tons of kids !!

 

[MerlintheMad]

GREAT PIC AS USUAL !! . The history of Merlin and cars ...................and tons of kids !!

 

[monusa]

Please tell me more about your JB4 experience with your 2.0.

Well, I could go on for a while but I had never tried any type of tuning before the Stinger. Something went south in the engine and had to get the whole thing replaced (no blame on jb4 - warranty replacement). Took about a month but once I got it back, the thing runs a LOT stronger than when I bought it new.

have the JB4/ HKS plugs/ K/N drop filter. the JB4 performs as advertised especially "if used as directed"...I run MAP 2 mostly and the performance is really good. Wakes the 2.0 up quite a bit. I only have about 2K miles on the plugs and plan to pull one at every 5K to check how things are running. the logs help a lot as well. Tried MAP3 but the new engine hits the boost safety and shuts the unit down (good thing) so I just leave it at map2. Don't plan on going any further with the 2.0 because I think it is not worth it to push the 2.0 past map 2. Some have gone a lot further and have had good results. I am waiting to test drive one of the new 2.5's to see if an upgrade to that is worth it. I think there is potential there that does not exist with the 2.0. Otherwise, looking to make the switch to a Supra ( a 22my Stinger is still in the cards...)

 

[photoguy007]

Well, I could go on for a while but I had never tried any type of tuning before the Stinger. Something went south in the engine and had to get the whole thing replaced (no blame on jb4 - warranty replacement). Took about a month but once I got it back, the thing runs a LOT stronger than when I bought it new.

have the JB4/ HKS plugs/ K/N drop filter. the JB4 performs as advertised especially "if used as directed"...I run MAP 2 mostly and the performance is really good. Wakes the 2.0 up quite a bit. I only have about 2K miles on the plugs and plan to pull one at every 5K to check how things are running. the logs help a lot as well. Tried MAP3 but the new engine hits the boost safety and shuts the unit down (good thing) so I just leave it at map2. Don't plan on going any further with the 2.0 because I think it is not worth it to push the 2.0 past map 2. Some have gone a lot further and have had good results. I am waiting to test drive one of the new 2.5's to see if an upgrade to that is worth it. I think there is potential there that does not exist with the 2.0. Otherwise, looking to make the switch to a Supra ( a 22my Stinger is still in the cards...)

That sucks about needing a new engine.

How's performance with map 1?

Though, what you're describing is exactly how I would run the tune, map 2, no need for exhaust upgrade, just a nonaggressive tune. After my road trip, I actually really like the stock performance. But, I was contemplating the JB4 previously.

Could you speak more of map 2? Please go on as much as you like! Is the powerband the same as stock, just more boost? Smooth? Less delay in throttle? Are you running 91 or 93 octane? Any actual Dyno numbers at the crank? Sorry, haven't been able to find this info by searching.

 

[monusa]

Could you speak more of map 2

Sure. First and foremost, if you decide to go jb4, do yourself a favor and spring for the plugs (HKS MX45XL). Got mine on Amazon but they go quick. They will need to be gapped regardless of what any documentation says!!!!! The stock plugs are said to be ok on map 1 with a re-gap of 0.024 - 26. Good thing about the 2.0 is that the plugs can be changed in about 15 mins. 3.3 owners wish they had it that good. For me, no stock plugs. just want the best opportunity for "full combustion" and "safety". Keep the stock plugs for "just in case".

Don't go changing maps without logs and if you are not sure about reading your own, send them to Terry or in the "tuning" thread on this forum and have them critiqued. If you get a thumbs up, move to next map. If you are not going to go "all out' with mods, stay with map2. I have no dyno runs but I can tell you based upon logs and drive-ability, MAP 2 produces a very noticeable HP gain as well as torque. Enough to justify the JB4 in my opinion. I have only run 93 octane from day one even before attempting the jb4. MAP2 "Technically" only requires 93 octane but I know from my logs/performance that adding an "off the shelf" octane booster such as "Royal Purple" makes a difference in how smooth boost is delivered over the RPM range. This is only a 3 point octane boost but any additional helps. If you want serious octane boost, go for the "Boostane". You can order it online and has to be measured correctly.

In all, after the new engine, I only run the jb4 for the added "kick" when passing a$$holes on my commute but engine is running very well "stock". That being said, it will be your choice at the end of the day but I REALLY can't wait for my local dealer to get one of the 2.5's on the lot. They have an "Ascot" green MY 22 in the showroom but I still want to wait on the 2.5.

HTH......